7 replies to this topic

[pamojja]

A Health Economic perspective on COVID-19

 

29th March 2020

 

The current COVID pandemic has brought a very thorny and difficult issue to the forefront. How much money should we, as a society, spend on keeping people healthy/alive? No-one has ever fully got to grips with this question, but it has never been more important than now.

The reason why I say this is that the US Govt has set aside two trillion dollars to deal with the crisis, in the UK it is over three hundred and fifty billion pounds, which is almost three times the current yearly budget for the entire NHS. Is this a price worth paying?

 

..rest at site

[adamh]

Part of the question is triage, how many have a good chance of recovering. If only limited resources are available then its foolish to 'waste' those resources on patients who have little or no chance of beating it, depriving patients with a good chance to improve. Now the question I think you are asking is if resources are available how much should we spend to keep people healthy or to keep them from dying.

 

If 2 patients present and one has a 90% chance of recovery and one has a 10% chance and you can treat only one, then clearly you give treatment to the one with the greater chance. On a broader scale, if you can save a few thousand patients but it will mean the budget is busted and millions will suffer, now the decision is not so black and white. If 1000 will suffer a lower quality of life by using the money to save one person, is it fair to the others?

 

If a whole nation suffers to save one life it seems clear its not worth it though we have been taught that life is the highest value. Also there is the fact that economic hardship means people will die because they don't have access to good food, clean water, preventive care and the like. So the one life we save dramatically, may mean that several others die who would not have died but its never clear cut who will die and why. 

 

Is one life worth $1,000? Probably but is one life worth $1M? What about illegal immigrants and criminals, should we spend our limited resources on them or reserve it for citizens and non criminals? A similar question is should we shut down a state or whole country thereby crashing the economy and throwing many out of work in hopes of saving a few lives? That too will cause deaths but its not clear that it equals x number of deaths for each day of quarantine vs how many lives saved.

[xEva]

 I have a question re inflation: with so much money injected into economy, the money that are not 'backed' by goods/services -- should not this money (and the cash we have now) become worthless?

 

[BlueCloud]

 If 1000 will suffer a lower quality of life by using the money to save one person, is it fair to the others?

 

Right now and for the next month or two of confinement, the only "lower quality of life" most of those 1000 people will suffer through is having to sit their asses on their sofa all day and watch all 5 seasons of "Breaking Bad" on Netflix.

 

Also there is the fact that economic hardship means people will die because they don't have access to good food, clean water, preventive care and the like. So the one life we save dramatically, may mean that several others die who would not have died but its never clear cut who will die and why. 

 

No, nobody is going to die after this health/economic crisis from lack of access to good food, clean water or preventive care in Italy, France, Spain, Japan, South Korea, Sweden, the UK, Norway, Canada, Portugal or any other country with a system of socialized medicine and socialized public services and economic measures to help out individuals or small/medium businesses.

 

The only places where people might die out of the economic hardship, is the US, Haiti or some African countries. Haiti and some african countries, because they don't have the ressources to implement such a system. The US because people have chosen not to implement it.

 

China is basically a planet of its own, so it could go either way.

 

What about illegal immigrants and criminals, should we spend our limited resources on them or reserve it for citizens and non criminals?

 

That would assume that illegal immigrants and prisoners are already getting as good health care in the first place as "regular" people. I don't think that is happening even in the most ultra-egalitarian countries like Norway. So that's not an issue.

 

Basically, the answers to this thread's questions will depend massively on where you are living.

Edited by BlueCloud, 29 March 2020 - 08:53 PM.

[adamh]

Right now and for the next month or two of confinement, the only "lower quality of life" most of those 1000 people will suffer through is having to sit their asses on their sofa all day and watch all 5 seasons of "Breaking Bad" on Netflix.

 

 

No, nobody is going to die after this health/economic crisis from lack of access to good food, clean water or preventive care in Italy, France, Spain, Japan, South Korea, Sweden, the UK, Norway, Canada, Portugal or any other country with a system of socialized medicine and socialized public services and economic measures to help out individuals or small/medium businesses.

 

The only places where people might die out of the economic hardship, is the US, Haiti or some African countries. Haiti and some african countries, because they don't have the ressources to implement such a system. The US because people have chosen not to implement it.

 

China is basically a planet of its own, so it could go either way.

 

 

That would assume that illegal immigrants and prisoners are already getting as good health care in the first place as "regular" people. I don't think that is happening even in the most ultra-egalitarian countries like Norway. So that's not an issue.

 

Basically, the answers to this thread's questions will depend massively on where you are living.

You said:

"No, nobody is going to die after this health/economic crisis from lack of access to good food, clean water or preventive care in Italy, France, Spain, Japan, South Korea, Sweden, the UK, Norway, Canada, Portugal or any other country with a system of socialized medicine and socialized public services and economic measures to help out individuals or small/medium businesses."

 

You have a great deal more faith in socialism than I do or most people do. Did you know italy is almost bankrupt? The eu itself is not doing well and many countries in it are struggling. Perhaps you have heard of the $2T stimulus the usa passed? It gives aid to all those groups, we don't need socialism/ communism to take care of our people. In fact, in socialist/communist countries quality of care is lower than in usa though cheaper. I will give you that.

 

you said:

"Right now and for the next month or two of confinement, the only "lower quality of life" most of those 1000 people will suffer through is having to sit their asses on their sofa all day and watch all 5 seasons of "Breaking Bad" on Netflix."

 

Not everyone has the resources to stop working and sit on their ass for 2 months. Most people have to pay rent and netflix is not free either plus food etc. Many businesses will go out of business especially small business which is often just a few weeks away from bankruptcy if no money comes in. 

 

I like my chances in usa much better than being in italy, for example, which you praise. Did you know the death rate in italy is higher than anywhere else? Spain too has a very high rate. The main problem we have is idiot politicians banning life saving drugs and other measures. 

[xEva]

can anybody please answer my question? Economics is not my forte.

 

 I have a question re inflation: with so much money injected into economy, the money that are not 'backed' by goods/services -- should not this money (and the cash we have now) become worthless?

 

[xEva]

considering that this virus is not going to go away, and vaccine not being available for 1.5 years, and when it becomes available, general masses will not get it til 2 years from now, at best (med and law enforcement personnel will rightly be a priority) -- how long this madness is gonna last?

 

And what the next 2 years wiill be like? Do we really need this craziness going on, and for what, speaking rationally, to extend life for those in risk groups by a year, at most? at what cost?

[pamojja]

Well, economics isn't my strength either. But some authors are of the opinion the derivative market which created the crisis 12 years ago, has not at all been tamed, but was about but to blow up again. Therefore all the helicopter money now...
 

considering that this virus is not going to go away, and vaccine not being available for 1.5 years, and when it becomes available, general masses will not get it til 2 years from now, at best (med and law enforcement personnel will rightly be a priority) -- how long this madness is gonna last?

 

 

Which virus? The one in Italy which till now hasn't increased mortality in 65+ there? (But soon due to the economic ramifications will)

http://www.salute.go...tesi_ULTIMO.pdf

 

 

The everywhere installed Police-states wont go away soon. Since all have been asking for..

Edited by pamojja, 02 April 2020 - 05:45 PM.